457 réponses à ce sujet

[killnoob]

double post

Modifié par killnoob, 01 avril 2012 - 08:14 .

[BiancoAngelo7]

The Razman wrote...

slyguy200 wrote...

He never said tha he was paid by BW, i don't really know where anyone did.

slyguy200 wrote...

Raz is being paid to argue with us.

Imma vamoose from this thread, until the trolling stops from slyguy and LooP. Hilarious as they are.

Razman, in every single thread Ive seen you in, the ONLY thing you are doing is making arguments with people and looking for endless circle-logic discussions. If you want to find a troll, you need not go further than your mirror. Your general attitude and comments have two modes: childish fake innocence, like this post I just quoted, where you pretend to somehow be above people calling you out...

or endless fallacy based assumptions that you defend by rehashing people's posts with circular logic that is not defendable by any normal criteria.

No one will miss you "vamoosing" from anywhere.

[kbct]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

killnoob wrote...

not to ruin the fun of everyone bashing the game...but read it carefully...

http://www.amazon.co...pd_rhf_gw_p_t_1

the warning amazon issued was targeted at a particular seller: "Sent2u by hts-scotland."
"Dispatched from and sold by Sent2u by hts-scotland." It is more likely that some people have file a complaints against that seller.

you can still get collector's edition, PS3, pc version of the SAME game on the same AMAZON website(from different sellers). 

I just noticed the game clearly is selling from them still, the comment you made is correct but also note that 5 minutes ago they had 8 in stock now they have 5.

Please read:

Item Under Review

This product is not currently offered by Amazon.co.uk because a customer recently told us that the item he or she received was not as described.

We are working to resolve this as quickly as possible. In the meantime, you may still find this product available from other sellers on this page.

Modifié par kbct, 01 avril 2012 - 08:15 .

[Il Divo]

kbct wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

A1, A2 and A3 are still different endings. It was not A, A and A. Sorry but the product description is accurate even if your feelings were hurt about what you played. The product description on that site is correct and the product will be back up the moment a human on the other end see's the complaint.

The false adverstising claims wouldn't stand up in court, but that doesn't matter. What matters is people feel misled by the statements.

That is what it comes down to. This isn't a technically defective product - the game on the disc functions. I cant imagine how this would work - have everyone listening to the claim play through the ending or watch the cut-scenes to determine if it's A, B, or C?

[Dragoonlordz]

kbct wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

Then who do you think he is paid by? Care to share?

EA pay people to virally market their games on message boards and gamesites. Whether or not he's one of those, who knows.

The point is he agreed about a reply which stated should not be making assumptions then goes and makes an assumption about the other person being paid by the developer or publisher. It still equals hypocrite no matter how you look at it.

Do you think EA pays people to post on forums?

Do you think anyone or everyone who you disagree with is paid by them?

Sorry but "paid" is no better than "troll" as a retort to those you disagree with, a simple way for you or others to dismiss another persons veiw without actually countering it. Both comments/phrases scrape the bottom of the barrel as far as countering another persons statement.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 01 avril 2012 - 08:16 .

[kbct]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

kbct wrote...
Do you think EA pays people to post on forums?

Do you think anyone or everyone who you disagree with is paid by them?

Sorry but "paid" is no better than "troll" as a retort to those you disagree with, a simple way for you or others to dismiss another persons veiw without actually countering it. Both comments/phrases scrape the bottom of the barrel as far as countering another persons statement.

I didn't think you would answer the question.

[Dragoonlordz]

kbct wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

kbct wrote...
Do you think EA pays people to post on forums?

Do you think anyone or everyone who you disagree with is paid by them?

Sorry but "paid" is no better than "troll" as a retort to those you disagree with, a simple way for you or others to dismiss another persons veiw without actually countering it. Both comments/phrases scrape the bottom of the barrel as far as countering another persons statement.

I didn't think you would answer the question.

I do not think he is just like I do not think you are paid by Activision or another publisher to devalue EA's products. I also asked you a question and made a statement too.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 01 avril 2012 - 08:20 .

[freche]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

L00p wrote...

freche wrote...

 Reading the ME3 Product Description on Amazon.co.uk

Manufacturer's Description<snip>Features:

• A rich, branching storyline: Experience a sci-fi epic with multiple endings determined by your choices and actions throughout the game.

I'd say that no one got what that describes.

I'd argue that "multiple endings determined by your actions throughout" is pretty important.

Without the "throughout" word one could (hardly, but still) argue that your last three A, B and C choices would be considered as enough of your choices and actions to impact the ending.

Instead the word "throughout" clearly depicts that your choices and actions through the whole game, from start to finish, will impact the endings, which it does not do.

It is still a correct product descrption. Whether you have x, y or z fighting with you at the end, for example who steps off the normandy is based on choices you made prior to the end, the choices at the end still have an effect, the assets do have an effect just not as much as people would have liked.

Even if it's correct it could be considered misleading advertismenet for not being clear enough and I would say "throughout the game" means more then the last 30min in a 15h+ game.

[BiancoAngelo7]

L00p wrote...

BiancoAngelo7 wrote...

The Razman wrote...

slyguy200 wrote...

He never said tha he was paid by BW, i don't really know where anyone did.

slyguy200 wrote...

Raz is being paid to argue with us.

Imma vamoose from this thread, until the trolling stops from slyguy and LooP. Hilarious as they are.

Razman, in every single thread Ive seen you in, the ONLY thing you are doing is making arguments with people and looking for endless circle-logic discussions. If you want to find a troll, you need not go further than your mirror. Your general attitude and comments have two modes: childish fake innocence, like this post I just quoted, where you pretend to somehow be above people calling you out...

or endless fallacy based assumptions that you defend by rehashing people's posts with circular logic that is not defendable by any normal criteria.

No one will miss you "vamoosing" from anywhere.

This times a thousand.
It is NOT just this thread, he's been making a habit of thread****ting and I know I am fed up with it, and I guess others are too.

Yeah at first I took him seriously, then after the bajillionth thread I saw him/her doing the same thing in it got really old, really fast...  <_<

[Gatt9]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

slyguy200 wrote...

The Razman wrote...

Il Divo wrote...

Ah, but that's the thing: we can say how many endings there are and whether we got A, B, or C. They made it exceptionally easy for us as it's currently designed. It doesn't matter whether he's attempting to pass of the ability to kill Tali or whatever as an "ending". You could kill her in ME2 - is he going to throw that on top of the pile in his list of "endings"? I highly doubt it.  You see, ultimately it does have the traditional game format.

How so? Did you get ending A, where technology is destroyed and Earth is saved? Or B, where technology is destroyed and the Earth burns up? Or C, where technology is destroyed and you get to have a chat with Anderson? Or D, or E, or F, or ... you get the picture.

Our expectation was that there'd be loads of different endings. Instead, there's loads of slightly different endings. Do I see why that disappointed a bunch of people? Yup. Does that make it lying? A-nope.

No d, e, or f or anything else, just a1, a2,or b1, b2, or c1, c2 etc. they do not count as being full on addotional endings.
Changed angles again have you, well you are still pretty much wrong.

A1, A2 and A3 are still different endings. It was not A, A and A. Sorry but the product description is accurate even if your feelings were hurt about what you played. The product description on that site is correct and the product will be back up the moment a human on the other end see's the complaint.

Sorry,  but none of the product descriptions or descriptions in the interviews are remotely accurate.  Three endings that are completely unaffected by what you did in the game aren't branching endings.

The keyword here is "Branching",  you should probably do some research on it.  It means a series of choices based on what occurred at previous nodes",  not "Pick a color".

Further,  I realize it's your mission to defend EA/Bioware at all costs,  but you *really* need to realize you're only making the situation worse.  Every time you sit here and get an attitude because someone dared to suggest that ME3 isn't the greatest game ever just pushes more upset people over the edge.

Your choice,  you can realize it now,  or you can realize it next year when these boards are all gone because Bioware was folded.

[kbct]

Il Divo wrote...

kbct wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...
A1, A2 and A3 are still different endings. It was not A, A and A. Sorry but the product description is accurate even if your feelings were hurt about what you played. The product description on that site is correct and the product will be back up the moment a human on the other end see's the complaint.

The false adverstising claims wouldn't stand up in court, but that doesn't matter. What matters is people feel misled by the statements.

That is what it comes down to. This isn't a technically defective product - the game on the disc functions. I cant imagine how this would work - have everyone listening to the claim play through the ending or watch the cut-scenes to determine if it's A, B, or C?

You would have to prove BioWare was actively trying to deceive their customers. That would be difficult.

However, people are still pissed about the misstatements. You don't need a judge to tell you how you feel. The list of misstatements are as long as my.... well, it's long.

When customers are upset, it's not good for business.

Modifié par kbct, 01 avril 2012 - 08:29 .

[Dragoonlordz]

slyguy200 wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

...

Do you think anyone or everyone who you disagree with is paid by them?

Sorry but "paid" is no better than "troll" as a retort to those you disagree with, a simple way for you or others to dismiss another persons veiw without actually countering it. Both comments/phrases scrape the bottom of the barrel as far as countering another persons statement.

No, but you would say that wouldn't you, seeing as you think that we all think alike.
I have only ever accused hi of being paid, and that is because he has been trolling rediculously in a lot of topics and his arguments always end the same way. They are crushed and he comes back and says he has been trolled the whole time. I have been countering him but he has changed tactics and ignored the responses. 

I did not say all, I merely said others. Never referenced you directly either. If you counter someones argument even if they change tactics you counter that new one or ignore them. My comment about people who use the phrases troll or paid to dismiss another person does them no credit.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 01 avril 2012 - 08:28 .

[kbct]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

kbct wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

kbct wrote...
Do you think EA pays people to post on forums?

Do you think anyone or everyone who you disagree with is paid by them?

Sorry but "paid" is no better than "troll" as a retort to those you disagree with, a simple way for you or others to dismiss another persons veiw without actually countering it. Both comments/phrases scrape the bottom of the barrel as far as countering another persons statement.

I didn't think you would answer the question.

I do not think he is just like I do not think you are paid by Activision or another publisher to devalue EA's products. I also asked you a question and made a statement too.

I'm not talking about Razman. Do you think EA pays people to post on forums?

[Dragoonlordz]

kbct wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

kbct wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

kbct wrote...
Do you think EA pays people to post on forums?

Do you think anyone or everyone who you disagree with is paid by them?

Sorry but "paid" is no better than "troll" as a retort to those you disagree with, a simple way for you or others to dismiss another persons veiw without actually countering it. Both comments/phrases scrape the bottom of the barrel as far as countering another persons statement.

I didn't think you would answer the question.

I do not think he is just like I do not think you are paid by Activision or another publisher to devalue EA's products. I also asked you a question and made a statement too.

I'm not talking about Razman. Do you think EA pays people to post on forums?

I am in no position to say one way or the other. Which is why I did not. I talked about his case which was the very case I mentioned about from the offset not whether or not they do or do not in general.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 01 avril 2012 - 08:29 .

[Dragoonlordz]

Gatt9 wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

slyguy200 wrote...

The Razman wrote...

Il Divo wrote...

Ah, but that's the thing: we can say how many endings there are and whether we got A, B, or C. They made it exceptionally easy for us as it's currently designed. It doesn't matter whether he's attempting to pass of the ability to kill Tali or whatever as an "ending". You could kill her in ME2 - is he going to throw that on top of the pile in his list of "endings"? I highly doubt it.  You see, ultimately it does have the traditional game format.

How so? Did you get ending A, where technology is destroyed and Earth is saved? Or B, where technology is destroyed and the Earth burns up? Or C, where technology is destroyed and you get to have a chat with Anderson? Or D, or E, or F, or ... you get the picture.

Our expectation was that there'd be loads of different endings. Instead, there's loads of slightly different endings. Do I see why that disappointed a bunch of people? Yup. Does that make it lying? A-nope.

No d, e, or f or anything else, just a1, a2,or b1, b2, or c1, c2 etc. they do not count as being full on addotional endings.
Changed angles again have you, well you are still pretty much wrong.

A1, A2 and A3 are still different endings. It was not A, A and A. Sorry but the product description is accurate even if your feelings were hurt about what you played. The product description on that site is correct and the product will be back up the moment a human on the other end see's the complaint.

Sorry,  but none of the product descriptions or descriptions in the interviews are remotely accurate.  Three endings that are completely unaffected by what you did in the game aren't branching endings.

The keyword here is "Branching",  you should probably do some research on it.  It means a series of choices based on what occurred at previous nodes",  not "Pick a color".

Further,  I realize it's your mission to defend EA/Bioware at all costs,  but you *really* need to realize you're only making the situation worse.  Every time you sit here and get an attitude because someone dared to suggest that ME3 isn't the greatest game ever just pushes more upset people over the edge.

Your choice,  you can realize it now,  or you can realize it next year when these boards are all gone because Bioware was folded.

I know what branching means thanks, I have discussed it at great lengths on many forums as both a concept and affect on content. Bioware will not fold, they do not cave into bullying tactics. That won't change now. Any feedback they recieve they will listen to which has always been the case then 'they' will resolve it as they always have in a manner they wish to do so. People will continue to buy Biowares products even if you do not, the company and developer studio will continue to exist after you and others leave.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 01 avril 2012 - 08:30 .